There's another tick box that should be there as well.

"By ticking this box you agree that you will not be able to wardec another corp, nor will another corp be able to wardec you. Think carefully as once chosen you cannot change it when the corp is created"

A massive amount of players have no interest in pvp, get over it.

you do realise this entire thread is basically people whining that they've been beaten at pvp on the meta level, so apparently as compensation they feel entitled to free kills?

well, that's pretty much all it is.
pvp isn't limited to spaceship violence, and the people winning at pvp seem to be the ones not being wardecced... the resulting mewling is rather amusing.

people who whine about getting blown up get told to adapt

when they adapt and deny people kills and people whine about it, their whining about it is acceptable?

It-¦s funny when i see CODE people talking about pvp, when in relation to this thread the so called "saviour" of high sec is the main proponent for folding a corp upon getting decced.

He constnatly taunts and aggragate people to decc him, but he does no mean hold up the other end of the bargain he sets. If you look at his corp history his list is LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG with closing and creating the same corp over and over again.

Folding a corp upon getting wardecced and then recreating it is utter BS, there should be a cost or penalty. Or even be blocked from closing it for the duration of the war.

avoiding being blown up is just as much a part of pvp as blowing things up is.

Actually, no it's not, our atmosphere is completely colourless. The colours you see are the effects of various forms of sunlight refraction. Some examples include Mies and Rayleigh scattering.

you don't need a corp for PI, poses have limited use to most people (to the point that that few people use them, ccp said they couldn't be bothered to fix them, and a bit of a threadnought erupted).

as for the 11% tax, when most of the isk comes from LP and such... it's not as much isk as you'd think, the raw, taxable isk from mission running isn't that high. It's a small price to pay if your other option is somebody wardeccing any corp you join.

player corps couldn't be less attractive if they tried. as you know, i used to be a miner... there's no way in hell anyone with half a brain cell would EVER put any mining character in a player corp. when I used to awox corps, i'd pick mining corps because i knew they'd be easy pickings because they're clearly stupid, not to mention i always wanted a free freighter or orca.

the advantages of joining a player corp is that you don't have to put up with an 11% npc tax that only affects mission runners in order to be awoxed, wardecced, and mocked for your corp affiliation.

npc corps aren't the point here - wardecs are. they simply suffer from the issue i pointed out earlier, they're going to be absurdly abusable, or trival to avoid. we can't have a mechanic that's open to abuse so we're stuck with one easy to trivialise.

i wouldn't say skewed in terms of risk vs reward is the issue, but they sure as **** need fixing.

This thread is not a whine. Other people whine; not me. This is simply a decry and appeal to the public to fix an issue causing significant levels of emotional distress and unjust inequitable grievances against my gameplay.

Look, it's just different, OK?

While they're at it, make neutral logi flag as criminal in HiSec. It's time that form of wardecing dodging risk averse behavior stopped.

EDIT: For the dumbs who will inevitably post, of course I'm talking about neutral logi in the context of war.

Until people learn that both sides will have to change, nothing ever will.

People shouldn't be able to mass wardec to the ridiculous levels they do

and the existing wardecs needs to be scaled up in price as they are far too cheap

Exactly! Why should you have to change? It needs to be done your way. Playing any other way is just WRONG. Period.

Says who? And why?

I get it, you want changes that you want, and refuse to compromise. That's a fair opinion, but it won't get you anywhere fast.

You are suggesting that people simply get thrown to the wolves and that will be a net loss.

It won't, people would just move to NPC corps permanently. Then undoubtedly you'd want people to be booted from NPC corps or NPC corps drastically reduced in efficiency.

The only end result you will be happy with is that people are forced to try to live in player corps with the massive wardec groups able to repeatedly wardec and farm them for kills. Hardly seems like a balanced system.

Why is this so bad and such a "hot" issue?

I'm not trying to be argumentative but you keep repeating that there should be penalties without actually stating why.

So while wardecs are indeed useless at their job, that's unrelated to the fact that they're also largely useless for doing what was never their job, namely allowing unrestricted high sec piracy in the name of showing "carebears" that EVE is a cold HARD PLACE of HARD MEN making HARD DECISIONS in HARD PIXELLATED SPACESHIPS.

You WD'd a Corp. That Corp no longer exists. Job done. Just because "another" organisation emerges to take an opportunity to fill the hole, you created. Does not mean the WD failed in its task.

Sure they do. War Declarations target corporations, not individuals. So if the corporation disbands, congratulations, you've destroyed an entire corporation without firing a shot.

No, just less than sympathetic that current game mechanics make it moderately more difficult to farm small corps for killmails and ransom.

so basically the tl;dr has come down to "i don't like that players can evade wardecs targeted at corporations"?

If I go to war to cripple a rivals supply chain and they drop the corp and join another I have have not won. Their freighters are still shipping goods.

I got vilified on the forums, in game, by messages etc, simply because I didn't play the game as the vocal minority thought I should. I played how I wanted to play and was hated for it, they were as insistent as some in this thread that players must be playing the game the wrong way simply by using the play styles available.

Why do you think War Decs are the one area of the entire game where CCP is adamantly opposed to people using any means to get around them?

What is being complained about here is that some people who do not want to "PEW PEW" PvP can use game mechanics to avoid it.

I don't disagree, but the lack of safety you are suggesting isn't right. You want to force people in corps to be victims with no option but to fight back, yet they stand no chance against a high competent and experienced wardec group. That's not going to lead to better content, that's just going to lead to a reduction in subs, since you're effectively campaigning to remove a playstyle from the game.

This is the main issue. People are targeting corps that are essentially a chat channel with (I hope) lower tax rates. Stop doing that, and the outcomes will be better.

Send me your Rattlesnake fit, mines crap :-)

So what about corps like Red Frog?

As I said before - you can always inflict PvP on people. You cannot force them to actively participate in their own demise.

I've seen hypocritical double standards before but ths takes the cake. You JUST posted telling people what corps they should and should not war dec.

Realistically assessing a financial situation != scare mongering.

You don't do that by removing whole gameplay styles which you've supported for years.

We're not talking about a sane wardec system though. What's being suggested is taking existing PvE oriented players and forcing them to have to fight, die or quit when confronted with the mass wardeccers, instead of being able to avoid them as they always have.

Nuking one side of it doesn't even resemble "sane".

One thing I can practically guarantee. If CCP makes significant changes to the wardec mechanic in the way you are suggesting, you are going to wake up as unhappy with the end result as all of those people who begged and pleaded for freighters to get lowslots. CCP seems to have mastered the true art of compromise - make everyone equally unhappy with the result.

ITT: some people are playing in the sandbox in a way which ruins someone else's way of playing in a sandbox and this has to be changed because sandbox should work in a way I want and not in a way it actually does at the moment.

This thread has been better entertainment than the incursion whining threads, kudos to OP.

What I'm saying is that the wardecc mechanics are working as designed.

Until they do the burden is on the wardeccer to find the right targets. And really, if you want fights but aren't willing to put forth the effort to find them why do you deserve them?

They are putting forth the effort to defend themselves via what you call wardec dodging. So what's your complaint now? That it takes too much effort to find a corp that can't easily dodge a wardec?

Avoidance is a defense. Acknowledging they avoided a situation that favors their opponents means they did defend themselves.

So spending time and isk to close a corp and reform is not effort. Randomly clicking declare war is effort?

Because as I stated earlier. If you put effort into picking your wartarget then you won't have to worry about dodgers.

2 differing situations in scale. We've seen just about anything worthy of exploit be declaired as such when practiced to the point that dec dodging is. Especially when attention is drawn to it.

This has had that attention numerous times. That it was fully intended or not isn't the issue, the unintended is praised here.

I dunno maybe the fact that it's been this way for how many years? A decade?

Then stop being lazy HTFU and gank them. There's absolutely nothing preventing you from ganking them and gaining the PVP you so richly desire.. Well other then obvious laziness and risk aversion (that kill right omg nuuuu).

Well in the early days I didn't care about it because I did real pvp aka nullsec.

Okay so I cannot comment on a current mechanic because I don't know when that mechanic became the current mechanic and I'm not aware of every change to said mechanic going back to the creation of the game. Sooo I'm pretty sure you just eliminate everyone from being able to comment on this subject.

Grow some and go pick a fight where all the other pvp'rs are. Seems to me you are afraid to actually get into a fight with a group that has the experience to give you a good fight.

It's the afternoon where I am. Actually, it's closer to the evening. Which for me means cracking open another six pack.

3am? That's also a good time to crack open a six pack.

It's a working mechanic they are using to avoid the combat. Fleeing is a perfectly valid tactic.

The surrender mechanic is different.

That's how you fleet but only if the aggressor lets you. You are basically asking permission to be left alone and paying for that. If the aggressor says no, you would prefer people to be stuck in war for eternity?

Leaving a corp is a perfectly valid tactic. Disbanding a corp is a perfectly valid tactic. Even if they banned the CEO from making a new corp for 7 days, they could just make one on an alt and join it.

You are asking for ridiculous changes which would make absolutely no difference, and all because you want to be able to wardec people who have absolutely nothing to protect and expect them to actively protect their nothing. Pick better targets = problem solved.

Thing is, the base of the problem lies in a completely different area than wardec. If you want this to change, then you need to adress Corporations as whole, usage and benefits of stations and POSes, assets in general and several other features as well (and that would probably make a mega wall of text). The problem "corps = chat channel" is not in the wardec mechanic.

So just to be clear, your best Ship vs Ship has been against others who are also looking to Ship vs Ship and wasn't stomping those who had no chance (aka new players and/or indy players).?

All the suggestions for 'fixing' war decs seem to boil down to , "The attacker should be in absolute control of the war at all times, and the only option for the defender should be to either accept it, or to spend a week in an NPC corp as punishment ."

If you come to shoot me I have several choices to make..sit there and get shot in the face, shoot back if possible, or duck and run for cover.

Therein lies the issue, some think ducking is not cool.

I asked you about the exploit several pages ago, you still haven't answered though.

Kaarous, I have to be honest, I wouldn't call it an exploit myself. It is a current feature of the game working maybe not quite as intended, maybe working exactly as intended, I don't know myself, it's hard to tell. Who knows, maybe the implementation of the surrender system and the last round of wardec changes along with it are a step towards a full rebalance of the wardec system. You know how CCP do these things sometimes, in bits and pieces. It sure as hell wouldn't be the first time.

I disagree with you that it's an exploit I'm sorry, it just seems over the top tbh. There are more sensible arguments in favour of making it more difficult to avoid wardecs, although most of them have already been discussed and this thread is becoming incredibly repetitive and redundant.

What's inconsistent? You can disband and reform your corp any time you want. In or out of a war.

In what way is it not intended?

If it wasn't intended, it's a bug and would undoubtedly be fixed by now.

The thing is, changing it wouldn't make more people available to be shot, since those people are not going to just sit there and die, so what is the point of changing it?

Set it to what though?

The other mechanic is not there to fill the function.

The surrender mechanics is aggressor controlled.

The reforming of the corp is defender controlled.

Change the surrender mechanic so the aggressor ifs forced to accept whatever terms the defender sets, and then they will be the same.

So we're back to the price doesn't actually matter and it's all about the cooldown. And how would that stop people just creating shell crops with burnable CEOs, then moving their actual pilots to the corps?

And there's a difference between a bug that they may not know about and something that has been publicly discussed hundreds of times.

"if a player doesn't want to fight, or pay, they will find a way within the game's mechanics to not do it"

Well if you're not risk-averse, stop complaining about the risk of wardecs not leading to successful extortion. Pick your targets carefully, and don't be surprised when a single-person corp simply closes up shop.

In the meantime, make sure you're familiar with the term "harassment". Your desire to lock people in one-person corps and take away their freedom of choice is and indicator that what you are doing is crossing the line from "villainy" into "bullying". You even said that much yourself.

Perhaps you need to find something else to do?

With the possibility of KA, no one has actually suggested players being locked to a WD'd corp. It is their inability to actually read what is being said, that causes their confusion

CCP have blanket declared ANY method of evading CONCORD as a bannable exploit.

In contrast, regarding your demand for proof that dec-dodging is not an exploit, CCP have NOT declared dec-dodging an exploit nor banned anyone for doing it in the several years it's been a viable and trivial mechanic for avoiding wars when you have no in-space assets to protect.

Further, if you *really* think it's an exploit, a forum post is the incorrect way to bring attention to it. There are specific channels and guidelines for reporting suspected exploits to CCP that I advise you to use. I suggest this solely for your benefit so as to avoid a lock or more severe GM reprisal for improperly and publicly describing a potential exploit.

You've spelled out the details clearly for this corp cycling, dec dodging mechanic you claim is an exploit.

Just, you know... seeking clarification there.

I have often found myself aligned in viewpoint with you Kaarous, however I completely disagree here. Rules are applied as CCP see fit - I would strongly recommend that pilots do not attempt to evade Concord's retribution.

Doesn't this leave the door open for perpetual rotating decs forcing a corp to stay open indefinitely with no way out?

The consequence is they had to leave the corp. Doesn't do much for your employment record.

CCP made it easier to dodge war-decs so I doubt they'll do a 'U' turn, especially as it won't achieve the result you want. Unless the result you want is to make life more difficult for people that they just give up on EVE.

KA, You know you're right, I know you're right, most people know you're right. Unfortunately there are those that a good honest balancing, just, maybe, might, make their game ever so slightly, barely, imperceptibly, damaged.

Your head is in need of a crash helmet for all the brickwalls you seem to be bashing it against......

If they wanted to fight in war-decs they wouldn't be trying to avoid them.

If you cannot see the problem with that......................

I'm not sure what definition of 'balance' you're using, but I don't think it's the traditional one.

CCP has rather clearly stated that is not an 'unintended mechanic'.

Difference is you see it as broken, I don't.

I see it as a way to keep people playing the game, without getting bored sitting in stations or playing other games.

The main problem with the game is that it tries to cater for PvPers and PvEers, those two groups never mix well.

Doesn't benefit me at all as I don't disband and reform corps.

I know this might be hard to believe but there are people in the world that can think beyond, what do they get out of it.

You're making an assumption that I don't like you or people like you.

Thought processes tend to work better if not clouded by emotions.

I wouldn't even call myself a carebear as it's more a mix of the two.

Actualy if you drop corp and reform to often CCP will get on you for it.

I suspect that reason was to reduce harassment of corps, meaning corps that keep hitting on the same corps that are incapable of fighting back.

Which comes back to, better to have people playing than bored sitting in stations or playing something else.

You say that, but what about a group of friends that are PvE orientated, if you were in charge their only option would be to leave the game and play another MMO.

I play in solo corps these days, If I couldn't have a solo corp. I wouldn't be here either.

Actually you are wrong.

A corp. is no different to a guild, being in an npc corp. is nothing like being in a corp./guild.

Don't think I've ever said there shouldn't be PvP in high-sec, you're starting to sound like a troll again.

That and their own selfish reasons, which blinds them to all reason and sense. They have to know it is wrong. No one, and I mean no one could be that low of an I.Q.

Me Me Me and all Me. screw balance. Screw, good for the game. Me Me Me

Wow, where is a mirror when you need one.

What are you looking to gain out of a war dec? A "gf o7" or a way to shoot carebears without being concorded? I would wager it's the latter. The war dec corps are their own worst enemies, if decs were done in a meaningful way instead of a concord dodge then you wouldn't have people dropping corp to avoid them in the first place.

Buck up buttercup you're not a special snowflake, if you want to play in highsec you have to play with the concord like the rest of us

Seems Kaarous is spot on to me. This is a video game, you can't really die here, none of this really matters.

Notice that I avoid pvp (actually I don't , I avoid "nonscheduled ship demolition and disposal", everything in EVE is pvp in one way or another) and yet Kaarous doesn't call me a coward. It's because I do so not because I'll cry if someone blows me up but because the ways i (and others) do so aren't chickenshit video game cowardice.

If the aggressor can't read or won't spend three to five minutes reading for a weeklong war, then why should the defender give a damn about it? Why is it worth the defenders time to fight someone who probably doesn't even remember who they are war with.

For a compromise to work, each party must give something up and usually gain something.

One other important point, they're not looking for a compromise.

That's because they have nothing to compromise about, it works ok for them as it is. Maybe not ideal but good enough.

You're effectively asking them to put themselves in a position where they can be harassed via war-dec mechanics. Who in their right mind would agree to that?

You must be one of those extremists, that will never be happy unless the game is the way you want it.

Not having to drop corp. every time for a start. CCP changed it to the way it was because they were losing customers.

Everyone that plays the game has agreed to play under the rules of CCP with CCP's game. CCP say dodging war-decs is a legitimate tactic, so they're are playing within the rules. People don't play by your rules, just in case you didn't realise that.

I know of 3 that left, not because of a single war-dec but multiple war-decs one after the other. I'm sure they weren't the only ones.

I don't see what this has to do with PvP, your targets aren't going to PvP. Don't even think you really care about PvP, it's about trying to harass people using the game mechanics with the backing of CCP. Luckily for the carebears as you call them, CCP doesn't see it your way.

Of course he doesn't, he's just using it as ammo, even though it was a troll post more than likely started because of this thread. Kind of like a spoof thread.

And I'm not a sock puppet. -.-

If you knew me from 2012 you'd know my standpoint regarding them.

Still leaves me wondering why the OP or anyone else would WD a 1 man corp though.

Also why do I need a reason to war somebody?

I just think its funny that so many people are talking about "PvP erry time you undock cuz EVE lolz"...and yet they choose to live in high sec.

Which stems from some peoples concerns that the game will become more PvE orientated and less PvP.

So your real problem with carebears is...they have the exact same mindset toward the game that you do?

I've watched you people try to destroy highsec from the day it was proposed. You can't stand the thought that someone somewhere might be having more fun playing the game differently from you.

"Sandbox for me but not for thee" is your warcry.

You have only your assumptions and preconceived notions.

It's really funny seeing you complain about people wanting changes at the expense of everyone else......

while we're at it lets remove gatguns... theyre oboslete at this point anyway due to logi and such

It would be crazy to force everyone to live in the Eve version of the wild west.

Go wardec people who have no problem with PvP. Go wardec people who want to fight.

You have no right enforcing your way of playing the game on others.

Then gank people

stop complaining CPP doesn't want to cater to your specific way of doing stuff, when there's clearly others who aren't interested in it. Can you be any more self-entitled?

All the defender in a wardec can do is to opt out.

That's not a lie from their perspective, if you weren't such an extremist you might see that.

Except that they need to recreate a corp, they might lose possible assets, they need to redo installations, ... Sure sounds like nothing compared to spending 10 seconds and paying a minimal amount of ISK, which is pretty much the only thing you need to do. You're right though, wardecs need some fixing.

In theory, but in practice that often doesn't happen.

You keep on about they have no backbone in essence, well you should take a look in the mirror, because in that respect you're no different. Scared to suicide gank are you?

What?! An alt!? EVE is a game of cold, hard, inescapable consequences! You can't just go and make a new character to get things done without inconveniencing or exposing your main character!

This is pretty much the essence of it. They just want their consequence and responsibility free high-sec ganks. Their arguments really make no sense and any reason just goes straight past them.

Or earlier when Kaardus referred to Red Frog as 'doing it right', when they literally exist as a chat channel and contract clearing house for undeccable NPC corp haulers, before going on to rant about how people who use PC corps as just a chat channel don't "deserve" the privilege.

The War Deccer argument might be more convincing if it had any coherent point beyond , "We need more easy kills!"

you keep throwing this word "harassment" around.

Would you all be fine then with a defending party being able to 'opt out' of a war for the same cost that went in to the war dec? See it as a buy out, a surrender fee. The surrender is automatic and happens 24h after it's been put through. It cannot be declined.

Is it really so hard to understand that some people just have no interest in shooting at, or getting shot at by other players.

A war-dec is not harassment, but people were using the old system for that purpose.

It's why we have the system we have now.

It's only an exploit in your mind, it's not actually an exploit because if it was CCP wouldn't allow it.

Nice to see you're keeping your level of competence consistent. This is the reason we have the current wardec system.

What I am not for is people crying because they use a valid game mechanic to avoid the wardec.

Wardecs used to be back alley ***** cheap few years back, but got raised because of the cheap price and massive dec-ability

You should know veers might not do something.

But I will.

I think that NPC need a reason to make people leave. Not force them, but give them a reason to want to leave. Seeing as most players don't care about the NPC Tax. It seems to a logical reason to up the tax rate. However if we can leave the Tax rate at it's current level, and come up with an idea to pushes the idea for NPC corpies to make a player corp I would be happy for that to happen.

And those reasons come back to the 4 I've mentioned.


I didn't add fun in there because unless you war-dec a corp. that wants to fight back the fun is all one sided. Plus the issue being discussed has nothing to do with corps that want to fight back as they wouldn't disband the corp. in the first place.

But since so many are coward and disband we need to waste hundreds of millions every week just to keep a MINIMUM number of wartargets around so our members have something to target on the timezones our contract targets are not online.